naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 24 bit vs 16 bit recordings

Subject: Re: 24 bit vs 16 bit recordings
From: "Raimund Specht" animalsounds
Date: Tue May 22, 2007 1:31 am ((PDT))
When converting nature recordings from 24 to 16 bit, there is no
dithering required. Dithering is only justified when one needs to
convert a very high dynamic range recording (e.g. 100 dB) into a
format that cannot represent such a high dynamic range. A typical
nature recording should always fit into the 96 dB dynamic range of the
16 bit format. If the conversion is made correctly, the noise floor of
the original recording will safely mask the (ugly) quantization noise
of the 16 bit format. So, in case the original 24 bit recording has
been made at a very low gain setting, just apply an appropriate amount
of digital gain to the 24 bit file before converting it into the 16
bit format.

Regards,
Raimund


--- In  Lou Judson <> wrote:
>
> Did you use proper dithering when you made the master for CD? Simply
> converting 24 to 16 without dither will sound poor. And what kind of
> dither used is another subject!
>
> <L>
> On May 19, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Paul Delcour wrote:
>
> > I once recorded by accident on my Edirol R4 in 24/96 mode. When I
> > downgraded to 16/44.1 I definitely could hear the loss in quality, in
> > detail mostly and lack of airyness, ie ambient space.
>






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU